On Logic and Alternate Universes

[Edwardo Piet]

A=A is true in all universes. You can't hypothesize your way out of that. I'm sorry, you just can't. You can't have a hypothetical that isn't itself. 2+2=4 because of the law of identity. I'm talking in base 10. If you want to talk another base, that's fine. But then whatever is true for that base is true for that base. If you're talking about a base in a different universe, then you're discussing a concept and a different language rather than different laws. I'm using our language, base 10, to explain to you that 2+2=4 regardless of what label or base is used in another universe. You're simply mistaken to think an extra thing popping into existence has anything to do with it. Two objects. Two more objects. Same thing as four objects. Yes in this universe. In another universe, that amount, would have to be that amount, it can't be 5. You can label it 5, but it can't be 5. An extra thing popping into existence, is irrelevant. Two things and two things is identical to four things, it's not two things and two things plus nothing popping into existence. Likewise, two things and two things equating to five things would have to be something equating to something it isn't, not something equating to something it is +1 more thing popping into existence. You really don't get it, you really don't get it, you really really don't get it. A=A is everywhere, it doesn't matter what mathematical language or concept it is, all of them have in common the law of identity, A=A. If we're talking about four things in the sense we understand it, in our language, then in another universe the results would be the same: four things in the sense we mean would be four things in the sense we mean, or two things in the sense we mean plus two things in the sense we mean would be four things in the sense we mean. There's no sense in which we mean in which two things and two things mean five things. In the language of another universe what would it mean? Irrelevant, again, we're not talking about other languages. We're using OUR language to describe laws in other universes, and we can't describe laws in other universes in our language in which A=not A or 2+2=5. We can mention such things, but we can't actually successfuly describe such things, all we can do is label. The important thing is to really understand why 2+2=4 in base 10 BECAUSE A=A. And to also understand that A=A is presupposed in everything, all hypotheticals, all non-hypotheticals, all potentialities, all non-potentialites, all possibilites, all impossibilites, all realities, all unrealites all universes, all non-universes, all descriptions. All descriptions are descriptions that are themselves. It's a tautology. You can't have a tautology without A=A. You can't have a tautology that says "if A did not =A then A would not =A" because that itself, as a tautology, is an expression of "A=A". "If A was not A it would not be A" because something is what it is, if it is it it is it, because A=A. You're saying the premise is a tautology that describes a hypothetical without the truth of A=A, but the fact it is a tautology at all implies that it is a tautology, which is another expression of A=A. A=A is the simplest expression of the truth of why all tautologies are true. You can't have a tautological premise that describes A not being A without presupposing that A is A. You can't have the law of non-contradiction without the law of identity.